JUDGMENT U.P. Singh, C.J. 1. In these appeals and the connected appeals arising out of the common Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 4th March 1997 in O.P. No. 12806 of 1.996, we have heard the counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The petitioners are the appellants. They have filed this appeal as a public interest litigation seeking reliefs against the Cochin Port Trust, Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment and Forest and the State. The question raised was whether the cement silos and packing plant will cause environmental hazard and violate the code of safety in locating the cement in the limits of the city. It was alleged that none of the statutory authorities like, Cochin Port Trust, Pollution Control Board, Cochin Corporation and the District Collector, charged with statutory responsibility of protecting environment have demonstrated that they have conducted technological study for environment impact assessment, in operating a cement plant in the thickly populated area of Willingdon Island. 3. The Pollution Control Board has stated in its counter affidavit that clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forest should be obtained before starting any construction for the proposed cement plant. The Port Trust authorities may look into these aspects, before permitting them to start the implementation of the project. In accordance with our earlier order dated 31st July 1997, we had directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest and the Pollution Control Board to file their counter affidavits. The counsel appearing for the Union of India also desired to file an additional counter affidavit. We had further directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest as also the Pollution Control Board to submit a report in regard to the questions raised in these appeals. 4. The counsel appearing for the Union of India also desired to file an additional counter affidavit. We had further directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest as also the Pollution Control Board to submit a report in regard to the questions raised in these appeals. 4. When the matter was taken up today for hearing, at the very outset, counsel appearing for the Government of India representing the Ministry of Surface Transport (Ports Wing) produced before us a letter addressed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India to the Chairman, Cochin Port Trust in regard to the setting up of cement handling and packing terminal at Q1; at COPT by M/s Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. The contents are as follows: "I am directed to refer to your letter No. EM6/164/Q1-BA/95, dated 13th September 1995, forwarding a proposal to allot 2-77 acres of land to M/s Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. for creation of cement handling facilities and to say that your proposal has been examined in the Ministry and it has been decided to disallow this project in the Cochin Port area. Yours faithfully, (Sd.) R. K. srivastava, Dy. Secretary to the Government of India." Copy of the said letter has been kept on record. All the parties appearing in the case representing the Cochin Port Trust, Ministry of Surface Transport, Ministry of Environment and Forest and the State of Kerala as also the Pollution Control Board and the Corporation of Cochin had nothing to say to the contrary in view of the aforesaid letter issued by the Government of India to the Chairman, Cochin Port Trust and in this view, it was contended that the appeals be disposed of since now the Government of India has decided to disallow the project in question in the Cochin Port area. We must appreciate the stand taken by the Government of India in the said letter. In view of the concern frequently expressed by the public for the protection against pollution and preservation of the ecology and environment for safety both in the present and future, it is imperative that everyone concerned has to endeavour their best to protect and preserve the environment for the common good. The Government machinery/agencies, including Port Trust and authorities controlling Ports have additional responsibilities towards the same. The Government machinery/agencies, including Port Trust and authorities controlling Ports have additional responsibilities towards the same. In that view, they should avoid projects causing pollution inherently like the present one which has given rise to these appeals. 5. No doubt, ports to be self reliant have to augment the revenue by providing or establishing additional or further facilities either by themselves or through privatisation of the projects. These infra structural facilities that are to be created through privatisation have to be for export and import which require essentially the ports and facilities of ports. Towards this, it should be desirable for them to consider and concentrate only those projects or operations which do not endanger environment or ecology in environmentally sensitive areas in Kerala including ports and a cause of threat to the lives in and around port areas. In this regard, restraint has to be exercised and each and every regulatory measures imposed under statutes has to be taken note even prior to consideration of such projects. 6. We must record our appreciation to the stand taken by the Government of India and the Ministry of Surface Transport (Ports Wing) in the letter mentioned above deciding to disallow the project in question in the Cochin Port area, to which the Cochin Port Trust, Pollution Control Board and the Government Pleader appearing for the State of Kerala have agreed. We hope and trust that the recurrence of such projects shall not be permitted, as a matter of course, to continue in future as well. In this view, these appeals stand disposed of.